The Great Lakes were created 10,000 years ago and have been used as shipping lanes since 1679. In the late 1800’s, the rise of the Industrial Revolution resulted in the collapse of the Great Lakes fishing industry in the 1940’s. Today, the environmental quality has improved, but this recovery is tenuous. The Great Lakes still require protection from ballast water dumping, invasive species, over fishing, toxic spills, habitat destruction, and air quality.
William Ashworth best describes the rise and fall of the Great Lakes in The Late, Great Lakes An Environmental History.
The Late, Great Lakes is a powerful indictment of man’s carelessness, ignorance, and apathy toward the Great Lakes. With the longest continuous coastline in the United States, they hold one-fifth of the world’s freshwater supply. Ashworth describes the wild life that once flourished in the region—beaver, salmon, whitefish, and trout—and describes the threatening elements which have displaced them—the predatory sea lamprey, the alewives, toxic waste, and volatile solids.
On October 28th, The Wall Street Journal reported on exemptions to federal air regulations, which will allow these steamships to continue emitting sulfur into the atmosphere. The regulations center around exposure to exhaust from diesel engines built prior to the mid-1990s.
Thirteen Great Lakes steamships would be exempted from tougher federal air-quality standards under a provision tacked on to a government spending bill by a leading Democratic lawmaker, House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D., Wis.), a move that has prompted protests from environmentalists. ….(the) 13 steamships would be exempted from a new EPA rule that would limit sulfur emissions from ships within 200 miles of U.S. coasts, including the Great Lakes. Without the exemption, the vessels would likely have to be scrapped, their owners said, driving up shipping costs.
Historically, the costs of environmental damage far outweigh the cost of preventing the damage. Perhaps, Mr. Obey needs to be reminded of this during election time. It is always shocking when lawmakers from the Great Lakes region do not protect the lakes and its inhabitants.
Perhaps you are wondering why you should care about this decision. There are two things to consider, sulfur emissions cause both health issues and environmental damage. According the EPA there are health risks associated with the inhalation of sulfur emissions.
The assessment concludes that long-term (i.e., chronic) inhalation exposure is likely to pose a lung cancer hazard to humans, as well as damage the lung in other ways depending on exposure. Short-term (i.e., acute) exposures can cause irritation and inflammatory symptoms of a transient nature, these being highly variable across the population.
The damage to the environment causes acid rain formation and acid deposition, which affects aquatic life, forests, visibility, and materials. In the aquatic environment, acidic water disrupts fish life cycles causing fish kills. Forests are affected by the resulting acid rain through the leaching of soil nutrients that results in tree die back or death. Visibility is reduced from 50 miles down to 5 miles due to dry acid particles in the air. Finally, materials and cultural resources are damaged quicker by acid deposition then they would be by natural wear and tear of normal pH range rain.
Mr. Obey’s reasoning is centered around unemployment concerns.
Ship owners who would benefit from the exemption called the provision a common-sense measure that would protect jobs in a region reeling from high unemployment.
While this reasoning is understandable, it is not acceptable. If these steamships are allowed to pollute, they should be under regulation to comply with federal air quality standards by a specific date. From an environmental and health standard, this ruling will have damaging consequences. Perhaps, grants or tax incentives could be offered to upgrade the engines / ships.
To qualify for such (exemption) waivers, companies would have to demonstrate that supplies of low-sulfur fuel are inadequate, or that compliance would cause serious economic hardship. Shipping-industry officials said there are about 13 diesel ships that fall into such a category and that could qualify for such waiver.
Is damaging the Great Lakes acceptable as long as you provide money for cleanup projects? Isn’t this like poisoning someone and then paying for their medical care?
Mr. Obey said the legislation gives the EPA $10.3 billion for the 2010 fiscal year—$2.7 billion more than in 2009—and includes nearly $500 million for a program aimed at cleaning up the Great Lakes.
Why would anyone jeopardize destroying something as beautiful at the Great Lakes?
- 2009 Great Lakes Photo Contest Winner Shawn Hamer – Auburn Hills, MI – Lake Michigan
